3 ms·

You shouldn't build your life here on a temporary visa. 4 years should be the maximum allowed stay, and the employer should be obligated to have you train your

You shouldn't build your life here on a temporary visa. 4 years should be the maximum allowed stay, and the employer should be obligated to have you train your replacement the entire time. Otherwise, it's just a wage-suppressing system of indentured service.

ckaygusu 4y ago
Why not actually treat them with dignity instead, and give them a legit chance to settle?
- the_mar 4y ago
  Because clearly people who weren’t born here are unworthy of being treated equally. And because “they took our jerbws”
- sokoloff 4y ago
  I am in favor of treating H1B holders with dignity, but I think it's at least fair (and likely proper) for any country's government to give priority and preference to its own citizens/permanent residents over the citizens/permanent residents of other countries. I think that's what the debate ends up being about in a time like this. If there comes a broad tech recession, should the US government prioritize the needs of US citizen/permanent resident tech workers or the needs of H1B tech workers? As much as I believe we must treat everyone with dignity, it seems eminently reasonable for the US government to prioritize the first group over the second group (and even unreasonable to not do that).
  - the_mar 4y ago
    What you say holds true. Of course the US nationals have to be prioritized. But the reality is they already are. Hiring someone on H1B results in lawyer fees and visa fees. Every company is already incentivized to hire domestically. Which I do agree is 100% fair. However how is extending the grace period beyond 60 days harming anyone?
    - sokoloff 4y ago
      Per upthread, I am in favor of extending the grace period beyond 60 days.
  - ckaygusu 4y ago
    I'm not disagreeing on the principle. As the sovereign of the land, of course you're going to prioritize yourself. The prioritization you're talking about does not come in as giving an advantage to the domestic worker, it comes in the form of hostile treatment of people who are here on work visas, and has been living here quite a while.
piva00 4y ago
That's not how immigration works, at all, much less for high-skilled immigration. It's such a bad take that falls into the bucket of "not even wrong"... Or perhaps you are in the xenophobic camp, which is just sad.
the_mar 4y ago
Whoa whoa, 4 years is not remotely short term. Why would anyone want to uproot their life and move here for the mere opportunity to live in the US for 4 years and have to uproot your life again? Are you supposed to be celibate for 4 years? The limits you are suggesting only discourages assimilation or giving a fuck about your life in the US since it’s only temporary. Also wage-supressing? You are supposed to pay market rate to H1B workers and since they work in the US and not off-shore this isn’t the money saving scheme you think it is. Besides all the H1B salaries for your company are published in a national database and have to be prominently displayed (aka printed and posted to some board somewhere in your office), so one could argue it does actually help wage transparency. Lastly, as to your genius point about training your replacement. If you can only be employed by a company for a certain period, you would technically not be an FTE, but a contractor. Most companies have policies barring any contractors from training FTEs (because it creates perverse incentives and opens companies up to discrimination lawsuits).
- linuxftw 4y ago
  We're talking about H1B visas, which are non-immigrant visas which should be short-term. The only reason a company can obtain an H1B visa for an employee is to certify they can't fill the role with domestic workers. Yeah, they're never going to fill the role with domestic workers if they don't have to train domestic workers. The wage equation is simple. More available labor means less wages. Nobody debates this. Let's not act like people here on H1B are some kind of humanitarian cause. They're the brightest and most educated in the country (according to H1B proponents anyway). My goal is to lift up impoverished people domestically. The best way to do this is to have more white collar jobs that lower-level workers can move into. If those roles are always filled, there's no need for scholarships or apprenticeships from companies to train the next generation of workers. They get to push the problem on the university system, and then ignore the vast majority of those graduates because they're only hiring 'senior level' positions.
  - the_mar 4y ago
    So you want to lift up impoverished people in the US by exploiting immigrant labor? There are many reasons why companies hire H1B people and if you do as you suggest you remove any incentive for anyone to want to pursue H1B. The effect will only be detrimental to the US economy. As a highly skilled immigrant I have personally generated 10s if not 100s of millions of dollars in profits for the US corporations. There are already very strong incentives for companies to hire domestically, that already work to filter our the best and brightest and most capable people in the industry. Plus the US has spent $0 training those people. By the way I am not saying the US is obligated to hire H1B workers as some humanitarian cause, but if the US wants to continue hiring immigrant workers it has to be mutually beneficial.

ckaygusu 4y ago

Why not actually treat them with dignity instead, and give them a legit chance to settle?

the_mar 4y ago
Because clearly people who weren’t born here are unworthy of being treated equally. And because “they took our jerbws”
sokoloff 4y ago
I am in favor of treating H1B holders with dignity, but I think it's at least fair (and likely proper) for any country's government to give priority and preference to its own citizens/permanent residents over the citizens/permanent residents of other countries. I think that's what the debate ends up being about in a time like this. If there comes a broad tech recession, should the US government prioritize the needs of US citizen/permanent resident tech workers or the needs of H1B tech workers? As much as I believe we must treat everyone with dignity, it seems eminently reasonable for the US government to prioritize the first group over the second group (and even unreasonable to not do that).
- the_mar 4y ago
  What you say holds true. Of course the US nationals have to be prioritized. But the reality is they already are. Hiring someone on H1B results in lawyer fees and visa fees. Every company is already incentivized to hire domestically. Which I do agree is 100% fair. However how is extending the grace period beyond 60 days harming anyone?
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Per upthread, I am in favor of extending the grace period beyond 60 days.
- ckaygusu 4y ago
  I'm not disagreeing on the principle. As the sovereign of the land, of course you're going to prioritize yourself. The prioritization you're talking about does not come in as giving an advantage to the domestic worker, it comes in the form of hostile treatment of people who are here on work visas, and has been living here quite a while.

piva00 4y ago

That's not how immigration works, at all, much less for high-skilled immigration. It's such a bad take that falls into the bucket of "not even wrong"... Or perhaps you are in the xenophobic camp, which is just sad.

the_mar 4y ago

Whoa whoa, 4 years is not remotely short term. Why would anyone want to uproot their life and move here for the mere opportunity to live in the US for 4 years and have to uproot your life again? Are you supposed to be celibate for 4 years? The limits you are suggesting only discourages assimilation or giving a fuck about your life in the US since it’s only temporary. Also wage-supressing? You are supposed to pay market rate to H1B workers and since they work in the US and not off-shore this isn’t the money saving scheme you think it is. Besides all the H1B salaries for your company are published in a national database and have to be prominently displayed (aka printed and posted to some board somewhere in your office), so one could argue it does actually help wage transparency. Lastly, as to your genius point about training your replacement. If you can only be employed by a company for a certain period, you would technically not be an FTE, but a contractor. Most companies have policies barring any contractors from training FTEs (because it creates perverse incentives and opens companies up to discrimination lawsuits).

linuxftw 4y ago
We're talking about H1B visas, which are non-immigrant visas which should be short-term. The only reason a company can obtain an H1B visa for an employee is to certify they can't fill the role with domestic workers. Yeah, they're never going to fill the role with domestic workers if they don't have to train domestic workers. The wage equation is simple. More available labor means less wages. Nobody debates this. Let's not act like people here on H1B are some kind of humanitarian cause. They're the brightest and most educated in the country (according to H1B proponents anyway). My goal is to lift up impoverished people domestically. The best way to do this is to have more white collar jobs that lower-level workers can move into. If those roles are always filled, there's no need for scholarships or apprenticeships from companies to train the next generation of workers. They get to push the problem on the university system, and then ignore the vast majority of those graduates because they're only hiring 'senior level' positions.
- the_mar 4y ago
  So you want to lift up impoverished people in the US by exploiting immigrant labor? There are many reasons why companies hire H1B people and if you do as you suggest you remove any incentive for anyone to want to pursue H1B. The effect will only be detrimental to the US economy. As a highly skilled immigrant I have personally generated 10s if not 100s of millions of dollars in profits for the US corporations. There are already very strong incentives for companies to hire domestically, that already work to filter our the best and brightest and most capable people in the industry. Plus the US has spent $0 training those people. By the way I am not saying the US is obligated to hire H1B workers as some humanitarian cause, but if the US wants to continue hiring immigrant workers it has to be mutually beneficial.